Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

CIA Leak

Valerie Plame poll 2005

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

Poll: Should Valerie Plame sue the leakers in civil court? (19 member(s) have cast votes)

Should Valerie Plame sue the leakers in civil court?

  1. No (1 votes [5.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

  2. No - no crime was commited. (2 votes [10.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

  3. Yes (8 votes [42.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.11%

  4. Yes - Harm was done to the United States (8 votes [42.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.11%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 27 October 2005 - 07:17 AM

There was a report on CNN this morning that Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame might sue the people that leaked her identity as a CIA agent.

Ok here the question should Valerie Plame sue the leakers in civil court even if the special prosecutor does not bring an indictment.

Edited by emsparks, 27 October 2005 - 07:18 AM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#2 FeFe_Roissy

FeFe_Roissy
  • Islander
  • 229 posts

Posted 06 November 2005 - 11:56 PM

Ya know.............I am sure Carl Rove, the V.P., and a lot of other people know the identities of a lot of people in the CIA, FBI, IRS, Secret Service, NSA, KKK and every other agency that has"secret" agents.  The "deep" covert CIA agents are the people who should be protected and they are almost always living in another country, working for the "State" department and most people wouldn't have a reason to find out who they are.  I don't think this lady was that covert, she had a vital job and I see no reason why she still couldn't work for the agency in another capacity which is probably what will happen and she will probably be happier since whe can stay closer to home.
Say My Name............Say My Name
When no one is around you....
Say baby I love you....
You ain't running games
Say My Name.............Say My Name
You're acting kinda shady....
and calling me baby.......

#3 Nick

Nick

    ...

  • Islander
  • 7,130 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 12:14 AM

I'd have prefered a "not sure" or "depends on the outcome of the criminal case" option, but I voted yes.

If the criminal trial or trials convicts members of the administration of intentionally leaking the information, then I think it's valid ground for a civil suit against those individuals.  Assuming administration officials are in fact guilty, then their (illegal) actions have caused damages and the Wilsons (amongst others) are entitled to compensation:

-Valerie Plame/Wilson's career was destroyed.
-All of her potential foreign contacts are now compromised and all trust with them has been lost
-Her front corporation has been outed, so we don't (and won't) know the far-reaching effects of this.
-It's quite possible that other CIA operatives and contacts are or will be tortured, killed, etc as a direct result.

Abusing power in such a manner to deliberately out a covert operative of one's own government is one of the highest treasons I can imagine.  This is simply because we cannot possibly know the extent of the damage that would be caused.  If there's a conviction in this case, I think there need to be a slew more of classified civil and criminal suits to attempt to determine how much damage has been caused, and how much compensation is due.

Think of Valerie's co-workers--other operatives she might have worked with on a case that may very well be dead now as a direct result of her outing.  If any individual abused their security clearances in such a way for petty political purposes, they deserve the death penalty, IMNSHO.

-Nick

#4 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,142 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 11:45 AM

I voted yes, but I don't really think they could win, since there will be no criminal charges.
Can't Touch This!!

#5 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 12:52 PM

^^ That is yet.

Remember OJ was not convicted either and he lost his shirt in civil court.

According to the special prosecutor a crime was committed, only they can't prove by whom.
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#6 Julianus

Julianus
  • Islander
  • 1,660 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 02:01 PM

From what I've heard/read Mrs. Wilson does not qualify as "covert." Therefore the "leakers" (and only God knows how many and who they might be if as Andrea Mitchell said Mrs. Wilson's CIA connection was known to herself and other journalists.
Rather than damage I think this has shown even more clearly the incompetence and political infighting that has undermined the CIA's credentials as an intelligence agency.

#7 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 02:44 PM

Julianus, on Nov 7 2005, 03:01 PM, said:

From what I've heard/read Mrs. Wilson does not qualify as "covert." Therefore the "leakers" (and only God knows how many and who they might be if as Andrea Mitchell said Mrs. Wilson's CIA connection was known to herself and other journalists.
Rather than damage I think this has shown even more clearly the incompetence and political infighting that has undermined the CIA's credentials as an intelligence agency.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


That is not what the special prosecutor said in his news conference when he announced the Libby indictments. It was not what CNN reported. As to your sources I will take Mr. Fitzgerald’s assessment.

CNN, on Saturday, October 29, 2005; Posted: 6:50 a.m. EDT (10:50 GMT), said:

Before Novak's column, Plame's role as a CIA officer was classified and "not widely known" outside the intelligence community, Fitzgerald said.

Full CNN article here

Fitzgerald news conference where he announced the Libby indictments

FDC, on He-MEDIA Friday, October 28, 2005; 3:57 PM, said:

FITZGERALD:
Before I talk about those charges and what the indictment alleges, I'd like to put the investigation into a little context.

Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community.

Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.

FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security.

Valerie Wilson's cover was blown in July 2003. The first sign of that cover being blown was when Mr. Novak published a column on July 14th, 2003.

But Mr. Novak was not the first reporter to be told that Wilson's wife, Valerie Wilson, Ambassador Wilson's wife Valerie, worked at the CIA. Several other reporters were told.

In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked to Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson.

Full Transcript here

You can say as often as you like Mrs. Wilson was not a secret CIA employ, and you can try to avoid the collateral damage to the nation security in outing her. But the TRUE FACTS are that the espionage act was violated and damage was done to the national security.

Edited by emsparks, 07 November 2005 - 02:48 PM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#8 Julianus

Julianus
  • Islander
  • 1,660 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 03:12 PM

Quote

But the TRUE FACTS are that the espionage act was violated and damage was done to the national security.
Apparently Mr. Fitzgerald disagrees since Mr. Libby was not indicted for that.

#9 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,142 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 03:42 PM

^ There may still be charges against Rove.
Can't Touch This!!

#10 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 03:44 PM

Julianus, on Nov 7 2005, 04:12 PM, said:

Quote

But the TRUE FACTS are that the espionage act was violated and damage was done to the national security.
Apparently Mr. Fitzgerald disagrees since Mr. Libby was not indicted for that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


With respect that’s not what Mr. Fitzgerald said, and the case is still being investigated.

According to Mr. Fitzgerald, and it should also be in the transcript quoted above, Libby was indicted because he prevented Mr. Fitzgerald from pursuing the criminal case, I believe it is called “obstruction of justice.” Just because Libby was indicted on these counts does not preclude him from being indicted on other charges.

“It an’t over till it’s over.”

Edited by emsparks, 07 November 2005 - 03:48 PM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#11 Nonprofit

Nonprofit
  • Islander
  • 2,163 posts

Posted 07 November 2005 - 10:22 PM

Quote

emsparks Posted Oct 27 2005, 06:17 AM
There was a report on CNN this morning that Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame might sue the people that leaked her identity as a CIA agent.

Ok here the question should Valerie Plame sue the leakers in civil court even if the special prosecutor does not bring an indictment.

There first, has to be proof of the leak and who leaked it,  before she can sue anyone.

RuReddy

#12 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 08 November 2005 - 07:55 AM

RuReddy1, on Nov 7 2005, 11:22 PM, said:

Quote

emsparks Posted Oct 27 2005, 06:17 AM
There was a report on CNN this morning that Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame might sue the people that leaked her identity as a CIA agent.

Ok here the question should Valerie Plame sue the leakers in civil court even if the special prosecutor does not bring an indictment.

There first, has to be proof of the leak and who leaked it,  before she can sue anyone.

RuReddy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I really don’t know what to say to you and stay within the board’s guidelines.

I gave a link to a transcript of a news conference where the special federal prosecutor makes an official statement proving that such a leak took place and yet you persist in saying there is no proof that a crime was committed. To make the statement he did, the prosecutor would have to prove to a judge that a cause of action exist, the cause of action being in this case the revealing (leaking) of Mrs. Wilson’s name.

Mrs. Wilson has the right to sue Mr. Libby for preventing the prosecution from finding out who was the actual leaker. As a matter of fact he doesn’t have to be found criminally culpable, to be found civilly liable, again I point to OJ. Simpson. You don’t seem to get the idea that in the United States, criminal and civil courts are two different courts, with two different standards of proof.

If your going to make statements that you want us to take as somewhat authoritative try doing a little research using reputable sources.

Edited in an attempt to correct errors.

Edited by emsparks, 08 November 2005 - 08:14 AM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#13 FeFe_Roissy

FeFe_Roissy
  • Islander
  • 229 posts

Posted 09 November 2005 - 01:37 AM

Why is it that all CIA agents work for the "State Dept"??  They can't come up with a better story??  occupation??  Why don't they say they are in sales or something?

Some of the most "covert" agents the U.S. has are military.  You hardly ever hear of them getting "outed".
Say My Name............Say My Name
When no one is around you....
Say baby I love you....
You ain't running games
Say My Name.............Say My Name
You're acting kinda shady....
and calling me baby.......

#14 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,913 posts

Posted 09 November 2005 - 03:10 AM

The military has their own court system, which is nothing like the regular court system.  In the military's court system, you are guilty until proven innocent.  Plus, the punishment for crimes done are much more severe than the regular court system.  And officers do get "outed".  However, this is all done mostly without granting media access to these trials.

#15 FeFe_Roissy

FeFe_Roissy
  • Islander
  • 229 posts

Posted 09 November 2005 - 10:40 PM

^^uuumm.........excuse me, in the regular court system (the one you and I are subject to), you are guilty until you prove your innocence, just like the military only they hold soldiers to a higher level of accountability since they are employed by the government.  The only people who aren't subject to the laws that all the rest of us are..........politicians, lawyers, judges~~the powers who run the government and who WE PAY to run it.    I had to deal with this horrific system for the first time in my life back in the Spring and it has been the most frustrating, time-consuming, UNJUST system I have ever encountered in my life.  It works in favor of criminals and those who know how to manipulate the law.  If I were part of the Gen Xers (or whoever you are) I would be very concerned about the direction the InJustice Dept is headed in the U.S.



I cannot believe they threw Judith Miller in jail for pleading the 5th on the subject of the "outed" CIA agent.   Judith, as an investigative reporter, did more covert work than most employee's of the CIA and FBI.  She interviewed BinLaden 7 years ago and tried to warn our government of the Islamic threats.  So did Steve Emerson   (another investigative reporter)...............  maybe we should be paying this group and protecting them because they seem to be gathering more info than our "public servants".
Say My Name............Say My Name
When no one is around you....
Say baby I love you....
You ain't running games
Say My Name.............Say My Name
You're acting kinda shady....
and calling me baby.......



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Valerie Plame, poll, 2005

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users